Soul, Mind and Body Flashcards
‘Plato’s view of the soul is more coherent than that of Aristotle.’ Discuss. [40] A Level 2021.
Para 1: Aristotle’s arguments for the existence of a soul are clearer
Para 2: Aristotle has better ideas as to how the soul is split but still dodgy
Para 3: Materialism stumps Plato but is not enough so Ari seems the most logical
‘Plato’s view of the soul is more coherent than that of Aristotle.’ Discuss. [40] A Level 2021.
Para 1
Aristotle’s arguments for the existence of a soul are clearer
WV
- Plato’s argument from linguistics
- Plato’s argument from opposites
SV
- Language has changed to fit the dualist perspective
- Not everything has an opposite – the colour blue
- Aristotle has clearer logic – analogy of the axe (soul animates the body)
‘Plato’s view of the soul is more coherent than that of Aristotle.’ Discuss. [40] A Level 2021.
Para 2
Aristotle has better ideas as to how the soul is split but still dodgy
WV
- Plato describes the soul as simple
- Tripartite soul – rational, appetitive, spirited
- Uses analogy of the charioteer to explain this
- Only philosophers have reason in control which is why only they - can be philosopher kings
- Explains inner conflict
SV
- Aristotle has a better view of the soul – Hierarchy of Being rational, appetitive, vegetative
- Encompasses all living things
- Avoids problems of elitism like Plato does
- Inner conflict can be explained by various thing e.g. hormones, drugs, upbringing
BUT
- However, both face problem of interaction – how can the immaterial soul influence a physical body
- Both lack empirical proof
‘Plato’s view of the soul is more coherent than that of Aristotle.’ Discuss. [40] A Level 2021.
Para 3
Materialism stumps Plato but is not enough so Ari seems the most logical
WV
- Argument from knowledge (Meno’s slave boy and one over many argument) - shows how forms exist, negative relationship between mind and body, body traps the soul, proves innate knowledge
SV
- Must we define a soul religiously? They assume that a soul exists but I could simply be mistaken for conscious action of the brain
- Dawkins elaborates on this with “soul one” and “soul two”
- Wittgenstein – family resemblance
- Phineas Gage
BUT
- Materialism is not enough due to qualia
- Aristotle’s imprint in wax – soul does exist but cannot be separated from the body is the most logical
‘There is no such thing as a soul.’ Discuss. [40]
Para 1: Plato’s explanation of the soul is inadequate
Para 2: Cartesian dualism is problematic due to its evident loopholes and extreme skepticism
Para 3: Materialism is the best solution but still cannot answer the question to a sufficient degree
‘There is no such thing as a soul.’ Discuss. [40]
Para 1
Plato’s explanation of the soul is inadequate
WV
- Explains a tripartite soul with three parts: rational, spirited, appetitive
- Analogy of the chariot to illustrate inner conflict
- We can see this inner conflict in everyday life
- Argument from knowledge: Socrates Menos slave boy, one over many argument (prove we recall knowledge that our Forms knew and have been restricted by our bodies)
- Plato’s linguistic argument: possessive determiner “my body” vs “I am Christina”
- Plato’s argument from opposites: everything must have an opposite (when we die something must change from when we are born and this is our soul leaving and entering our body)
SV
- If he’s so fussed about linguistics, then why does he refer to a soul as simple and then split it into three?
- Inner conflict can be better explained by hormones, upbringing or being under the influence
- Menos slave boy – leading questions
- One over many – Wittgenstein’s family resemblance and overlapping characteristics
- Linguistic argument – language has adapted to conform to dualist norms
- Argument from opposites – does everything really have an opposite e.g. the colour blue
‘There is no such thing as a soul.’ Discuss. [40]
Para 2
Cartesian dualism is problematic due to its evident loopholes and extreme skepticism
WV
- Right to doubt the senses as they can decieve us e.g. optical illusions
- Descartes’s problems with empiricism are that we do not know if we are sleeping, there could be an evil demon controlling us and our senses deceive us
- Cogito, ergo sum – we know the mind exists as we have the ability to question whether it does
- We can prove mind but not body therefore they must be seperate
- Leibniz law – for two things to be identical, they must share equal properties which the mid and body do not e.g. one is material the other immaterial
- Even attempted to solve the problem of interaction with the pineal gland
SV
- Irrational to doubt everything, just going to lead to a hyper stressed, unhappy life
- Masked-man fallacy – just because we believe one thing to be certain and the other to be uncertain does not mean they cannot be the same thing
- Didn’t actually solve the problem of interaction as we now know the true function of the pineal gland which is to produce the hormone melatonin to help us sleep
- Gilbert Ryle – ghost in the machine, category error
- Phineas Gage – received a brain injury and his whole character changed
‘There is no such thing as a soul.’ Discuss. [40]
Para 3
Materialism is the best solution but still cannot answer the question to a sufficient degree
WV
- Avoids the problem of interaction
- Dawkins soul 1 or soul 2
- Ockham’s razor
- Magnetic scanners in NASA can detect when people say something quietly and hope to one day be able to do the same with consciousness
SV
- Still faces a big “if”
- Materialists saying maybe one day is the same as big of a gap as dualist with an immaterial soul
- Qualia is impossible to describe
- If a soul is non-extended then how are we ever going to get empirical proof
BUT
- Neither give an adequate explanation
- What soul are we discussing? Religious or not?
Evaluate Descartes’ solution to the mind/soul body problem AS level 2022/A level 2023
Para 1: Descartes fails to thoroughly explain how soul and body are different
Para 2: Just because you doubt something does not mean we should completely discard it
Para 3: Gilbert Ryle addresses many assumptions Descartes makes
Evaluate Descartes’ solution to the mind/soul body problem AS level 2022/A level 2023
Para 1
Descartes fails to thoroughly explain how soul and body are different
WV
- Cogito ergo, sum – reasonable to doubt body (sleep vs dream, demon controlling us, sense deceive)
- Can apply Leibniz law – two things can only be the same if they have identical properties
- Mind is indivisible/ body can be altered but the person remains the same
SV
- Masked man fallacy- just because we think one thing to be certain and another uncertain does not mean they are not the same thing (Bruce Wayne is a billionaire, Batman is a masked vigilante, therefore Bruce Wayne is not Batman)
- Through psychology the mind can be divisible
Evaluate Descartes’ solution to the mind/soul body problem AS level 2022/A level 2023
Para 2
Just because you doubt something does not mean we should completely discard it
WV
- Cartesian/hyperbolic doubt
- We must doubt everything we cannot be certain of
- Analogy of the apple cart
SV
- Doubting something does not make it wrong (some doubt if the earth is a sphere)
- Leads to pessimistic life
- Doubt cannot be a characteristic of something but instead a property we place on it
Evaluate Descartes’ solution to the mind/soul body problem AS level 2022/A level 2023
Para 3
Gilbert Ryle addresses many assumptions Descartes makes
WV
- Counters the problem of induction with the pineal gland – says that is where the soul and body interact
SV
- We now have a role for the pineal gland (produces melatonin for sleep)
- Even if the pineal gland has the role he says, it still doesn’t explain how the physical and spiritual interact
- Ghost in the machine analogy
- Category error in response to Leibniz law
Evaluate the view that the thinking mind is separate from the body. [40]
Para 1: Plato’s dualism fails
Para 2: Descartes better but still fails
Para 3: Materialism best but still has flaws
Evaluate the view that the thinking mind is separate from the body. [40]
Para 1
Plato’s dualism fails
WV
- Innate rationalist
- Tripartite soul (rational, appetitive, spirited explained by analogy of the charioteer) explains inner conflict and philosopher kings
- Soul is simple
- Argument from knowledge (Menos slave boy, one over many) proves that we are going through the process of anamnesis and our Forms are recollecting knowledge from the realm of the forms
- Linguistic argument – possessive determiner “my body” vs first person singular and copular verb “I am Christina”
- Argument from opposites – everything must have an opposite and the opposite of a body is a soul
SV
- How can something be simple and then be split up into different parts
- Inner conflict can be explained in much better ways like drugs, hormones, psychology
- Socrates asked leading questions
- Wittgenstein – family resemblance theory
- Language has just changed to fit the dualist norm
- Not everything has an opposite e.g. the colour blue
- Problem of interaction
Evaluate the view that the thinking mind is separate from the body. [40]
Para 2
Descartes better but still fails
WV
- Can doubt the body but not the mind
- Threefold reasoning – senses deceive, there could be an evil demon controlling us, we could be in a dream
- Cogito, ergo sum – the fact that we can doubt our existence proves that we have a thinking mind
- Cartesian doubt – if you can doubt something you must dismiss it entirely
- Leibniz law – if two things do not share the exact characteristics then they are not the same – you cannot doubt the mind, can doubt the body, mind is immaterial, body is material
- Tried to solve the problem of interaction with the pineal gland
SV
- Cartesian doubt is depressing
- Masked man fallacy – doubt is not a property
- With modern science we have determined the role of the pineal gland is to produce melatonin
- Even if the pineal gland was how the mind influenced the body, that still doesn’t explain how an incorporeal thing can influence a corporeal being
- Gilbert Ryle – category error, ghost in a machine analogy
